The Journal of hand surgery · 2017
A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Bupivacaine Hydrochloride Versus Bupivacaine Liposome for Pain Management After Distal Radius Fracture Repair Surgery.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alter Todd H, Liss Frederic E, Ilyas Asif M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare pain experience and opioid use after distal radius fracture repair surgery performed with perioperative infiltration of the local anesthesia bupivacaine hydrochloride (Marcaine; Pfizer, New York, NY) or bupivacaine liposome (Exparel; Pacira, Parsippany, NJ).
METHODS: We conducted a prospective comparison of consecutive patients scheduled to undergo distal radius fracture repair surgery. Patients were randomized to either Marcaine or Exparel. Patients in the Marcaine group received 20 mL 0.5% bupivacaine without epinephrine into the incision and surgical site before incision. Patients in the Exparel group first received 10 mL 0.5% Marcaine with no epinephrine into the incision and surgical site before incision; then, upon completion of the surgery and wound closure, they also received 10 mL Exparel into the same site that had been preinjected with Marcaine. All operations were performed with the same surgical technique. Daily opioid pill consumption, pain levels, and any adverse reactions were recorded from postoperative days 0 to 5.
RESULTS: On the day of surgery, patients in the Exparel group reported significantly lower pain levels (3.9 vs 5.8) and consumed significantly fewer prescribed opioid pills (1.2 vs 2.0) compared with patients in the Marcaine group. However, there were no other significant differences between the Exparel and Marcaine groups on any subsequent days or in the total number of pills consumed at the end of the study period (7.5 vs 8.9 pills, respectively). No major adverse reactions were noted in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Exparel use was found to result in decreased pain and opioid consumption only on the day of surgery and not thereafter.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective comparison of consecutive patients scheduled to undergo distal radius fracture repair surgery. Patients were randomized to either Marcaine or Exparel. Patients in the Marcaine group received 20 mL 0.5% bupivacaine without epinephrine into the incision and surgical site before incision. Patients in the Exparel group first received 10 mL 0.5% Marcaine with no epinephrine into the incision and surgical site before incision; then, upon completion of the surgery and wound closure, they also received 10 mL Exparel into the same site that had been preinjected with Marcaine. All operations were performed with the same surgical technique. Daily opioid pill consumption, pain levels, and any adverse reactions were recorded from postoperative days 0 to 5.
RESULTS: On the day of surgery, patients in the Exparel group reported significantly lower pain levels (3.9 vs 5.8) and consumed significantly fewer prescribed opioid pills (1.2 vs 2.0) compared with patients in the Marcaine group. However, there were no other significant differences between the Exparel and Marcaine groups on any subsequent days or in the total number of pills consumed at the end of the study period (7.5 vs 8.9 pills, respectively). No major adverse reactions were noted in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Exparel use was found to result in decreased pain and opioid consumption only on the day of surgery and not thereafter.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.